Age is not just a number: How incorrect ageing impacts close‐kin mark‐recapture estimates of population size

Abstract

AbstractPopulation size is a key parameter for the conservation of animal species. Close‐kin mark‐recapture (CKMR) relies on the observed frequency and type of kinship among individuals sampled from the population to estimate population size. Knowledge of the age of the individuals, or a surrogate thereof, is essential for inference with acceptable precision. One common approach, particularly in fish studies, is to measure animal length and infer age using an assumed age‐length relationship (a ‘growth curve’). We used simulation to test the effect of misspecifying the length measurement error and the growth curve on population size estimation. Simulated populations represented two fictional shark species, one with a relatively simple life history and the other with a more complex life history based on the grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos). We estimated sex‐specific adult abundance, which we assumed to be constant in time. We observed small median biases in these estimates ranging from 1.35% to 2.79% when specifying the correct measurement error standard deviation and growth curve. CI coverage was adequate whenever the growth curve was correctly specified. Introducing error via misspecified growth curves resulted in changes in the magnitude of the estimated adult population, where underestimating age negatively biased the abundance estimates. Over‐ and underestimating the standard deviation of length measurement error did not introduce a bias and had negligible effect on the variance in the estimates. Our findings show that assuming an incorrect standard deviation of length measurement error has little effect on estimation, but having an accurate growth curve is crucial for CKMR whenever ageing is based on length measurements. If ageing could be biased, researchers should be cautious when interpreting CKMR results and consider the potential biases arising from inaccurate age inference.